Oh please. Tariffs on imported Machinery suited Northern Interests at the expense of Southern Interests. (It raised the costs of their competition.) No Tariffs on imported agricultural products also suited Northern Interests at the expense of Southern Interests.
They consistently kept their thumb on the legislative scale in ways that always suited the financial interests of the North, but did not suit the financial interests of the South.
Tariffs did not directly affect regions differently.
The effects were distributed by occupation, not region.
North and South, most people were farmers at the time. An Iowa corn farmer was affected pretty much the same as an Alabama planter by tariffs.
Those who benefited most from protective tariffs were the manufacturers and workers in specific industries. Two of the heaviest protective tariffs, BTW, were on hemp and sugar, both growth primarily with slave labor.
But you still haven’t answered a couple of questions I posed above.
Are you aware that tariffs in 1860 were the lowest they’d been in decades?
Let’s assume tariffs did indeed fall disproportionately on the southern economy. Would getting out from under them justify secession and the distinct chance of war?
Finally, let’s assume secession went over peacefully. How do you think southerners were going to pay for their new government and its armed forces? Would they be content permanently to have necessary military supplies be subject to interruption by blockade, or would they have introduced something with the effect if not the name of protective tariffs to encourage production of essential military supplies domestically?